Laparoendoscopic Single-Site Surgery Radical Nephrectomy

Department of Urology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Journal of endourology / Endourological Society (Impact Factor: 1.71). 02/2011; 25(2):159-65. DOI: 10.1089/end.2010.0673
Source: PubMed


The indications, instrumentation, surgical technique, and complications of laparoendoscopic single-site radical nephrectomy (LESS-RN) are being described in detail in an attempt to familiarize urologists with this novel laparoscopic technique. Our initial experience of 30 consecutive cases of LESS-RN is reported. The results indicate that, in experienced hands, LESS-RN is feasible and safe, with results comparable to those of conventional laparoscopic radical nephrectomy. Nevertheless, larger series of patients are needed to prove if the increased technical difficulty of LESS-RN justifies its use in routine urologic practice.

8 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: The conventional laparoscopic surgery is now paving way to the new technologies including robotic and laparoscopic single-site surgery (LESS). We present our updated experience on LESS radical nephrectomy (LESS-RN). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The data from patients undergoing LESS-RN in our two institutions were reviewed along with various clinical and pathological parameters. RESULTS: Between 2008 and 2011, 42 LESS-RN were performed (right = 22, left = 20) with mean (range) age and BMI of 63.7 (33-86) years and 25.1 (18-38.6) kg/m(2), respectively. In addition to the instruments in the single port, one extra 3-mm needlescopic instrument was required in 19 patients (right = 17, left = 2). In three patients, two additional 5-mm trocars and instruments were required. None required open conversion. The recorded adverse events include one bowel injury (intraoperative closure without the need for stoma), one postoperative bleeding requiring blood transfusion, one prolonged ileus, and one deep venous thrombosis. The resected specimens revealed pT1a (n = 3), pT1b (n = 33), pT2a (n = 4), and pT3b (n = 2) tumors. The finding of pT3b was incidental rather than planned procedure. None of the patients had positive margins. CONCLUSION: LESS-RN has proven to be feasible and safe. Beyond cosmesis, further advantages of this approach need to be addressed by randomized trials.
    World Journal of Urology 09/2011; 30(5). DOI:10.1007/s00345-011-0765-1 · 2.67 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: Laparoendoscopic single-site surgery (LESS) has emerged in the recent years as an alternative approach to conventional laparoscopic surgery which is accompanied by additional advantages over laparoscopy. In this work we attempt to review the current literature and to investigate the possible combination of LESS to other currently available approaches such as natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES), needlescopic and robotic laparoscopic surgery. METHODS: Extensive literature search on the topics of LESS, hybrid and pure NOTES, Needlescopic-assisted LESS and "Robot-assisted LESS" took place. Additionally, the accumulated experience from 118 LESSs performed in our departments is presented in an attempt to provide evidence regarding the mix of technique in LESS in urology. RESULTS: The challenging nature of LESS limits the broader application and acceptance. Expanding experience in single-site surgery has currently provided tools such as transvaginal access, needlescopic instruments and robot assistance that can aid LESS and enhance its efficiency without compromising any of its advantages. A mix of these techniques with LESS could ease the stiff learning curve of the second and benefit not only its performance but also the adaptation of LESS as a standard practice. CONCLUSION: Pure LESS although feasible, remains a technical challenge for the surgeon, preventing the widespread application of the technique. The goal of urologists on LESS surgery should not be the purity of LESS approach, but the superiority against already established techniques. A mix of techniques could be a key for the documentation of the advantages of LESS over conventional laparoscopy.
    World Journal of Urology 10/2011; 30(5). DOI:10.1007/s00345-011-0766-0 · 2.67 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim is to report our 1-year experience in transumbilical Laparoendoscopic single-site (LESS) radical nephrectomy (LESS-RN) and assess its learning curve. From September 2009 to December 2010, 18 consecutive patients with a solitary renal tumor underwent transumbilical LESS-RN. We grouped measured parameters on the basis of the first nine (group A) and last nine (group B) patients, and compared both subgroups with the control group (C), which was composed of the initial nine consecutive patients who underwent conventional laparoscopic RNs performed by the same surgeon. There was one LESS patient converted to conventional laparoscopic surgery for intraoperative hemorrhage and transfused. The mean for measured parameters of the groups A, B, C were: age: 58.6, 57.2, and 59.2 years, respectively (P>0.05); American Society of Aneshesiologists score: 1.9, 2.0, and 2.0, respectively (P>0.05); body mass index: 25.2, 23.5, and 23.1 kg/m(2), respectively (P>0.05); lesion size at CT scan: 5.0, 4.6, and 6.2 cm, respectively (P=0.039); operative skin to skin time: 191.6, 123.9, and 122.2 minutes, respectively (P=0.000); estimated blood loss: 172.2, 246.7, and 116.7 mL, respectively (P>0.05); incision length: 5.6, 5.9, and 7.4 cm, respectively (P=0.000); hospital stay: 5.8, 5.8, and 5.8 days, respectively (P>0.05). At the latest follow-up, all patients did not present any local recurrence or metastasis. In selected patients, the transumbilical LESS-RN can be safely performed with favorable outcomes. While a learning curve certainly exists, it appears to be short for an experienced laparoscopic surgeon.
    Journal of endourology / Endourological Society 12/2011; 25(12):1859-65. DOI:10.1089/end.2011.0015 · 1.71 Impact Factor
Show more